4 ms·

(slightly off-topic) I believe that part of the problem is that links do not work so well for that initial intent; and that is (IMHO) because of the coarse gra

(slightly off-topic) I believe that part of the problem is that links do not work so well for that initial intent; and that is (IMHO) because of the coarse granularity of that that can be linked; while theoretically you can link to anything with a URI, effectively they usually just point to documents and anchors of some of their parts. And that capability must be provided by the author, so, as the problems with the semantic web, most of the authors do not have incentives. So you are precluded from slicing and dicing content from others and, as Ted Nelson wanted, transcluding that part of another person's train of thought into your own document. So we repurposed the "link" tool to just navigation. Perhaps if we could add linkable annotations on pages of other people then we could play easier with other people's ideas...

njharman 12y ago
Extend Link syntax with CSS selectors (or something similar/lighter weight). Although you then gain problem of people changing layout of content. Still a lot of content is pretty static.
- reallyRaoul 12y ago
  http://hyperscope.org/ http://hyperscope.org/
jdmichal 12y ago
That idea went out the door with all the things that Web 2.0 brought. Even news articles, one of the most stable page sources I can think of, periodically receive updates that would render such a concept invalid. The concept of "slicing and dicing" with static links is simply not compatible with an Internet where pages can change content at any time. And I personally think that what we gained is worth a lot more.